11-19-2010, 02:29 PM
It seems that this is a rather problematic focal length. I've yet to see fast-aperture lens that really shines there.
The Sigma 30mm isn't all bad. It definitely has it's flaws (as pointed out in the PZ review) but not all of those really matter, depending on what you're shooting.
Border sharpness - rarely an issue for me. When shooting at wide apertures, most parts of the image are OOF anyway and when shooting stopped down, the borders get better. On the other hand, the center sharpness of this lens is exceptional. It's very usable even at f/1.4 and really shines from ~f/2 onwards... this is what made me chose this lens over the Canon 28mm f/1.8 (which is worse at f/1.8 than the Sigma is at f/1.4, judging from reviews and sample images).
CA - Depends heavily on the subject. I can only remember one image where I really found this to be a problem. YMMV.
Vignetting - Yeah, there is some when shooting wide open, but not enough that I ever cared about it. Again, personal opinion.
Bokeh - Although the bokeh is usually rather smooth and creamy, it sometimes produces some pretty ugly cats-eye-shaped onion rings in the corners. Doesn't seem to happen at all apertures and is only visible on a couple of pictures, but be aware that this can be an issue.
But guess what bugs me most with this lens? It the barrel distortion, which is (in my opinion) too high for a prime lens. I notice it more than any other optical shortcomings of this lens because you notice it right through the viewfinder every single time you have a (supposedly) straight line in your photo.
So would I buy it again? You bet! Given the lack of decent alternatives in that segment, that is.
Would I recommend it? Yes. But get it at a store with a good return policy because you might need to go through a few copies until you find one with good AF. I was lucky on the first try, though.
The Sigma 30mm isn't all bad. It definitely has it's flaws (as pointed out in the PZ review) but not all of those really matter, depending on what you're shooting.
Border sharpness - rarely an issue for me. When shooting at wide apertures, most parts of the image are OOF anyway and when shooting stopped down, the borders get better. On the other hand, the center sharpness of this lens is exceptional. It's very usable even at f/1.4 and really shines from ~f/2 onwards... this is what made me chose this lens over the Canon 28mm f/1.8 (which is worse at f/1.8 than the Sigma is at f/1.4, judging from reviews and sample images).
CA - Depends heavily on the subject. I can only remember one image where I really found this to be a problem. YMMV.
Vignetting - Yeah, there is some when shooting wide open, but not enough that I ever cared about it. Again, personal opinion.
Bokeh - Although the bokeh is usually rather smooth and creamy, it sometimes produces some pretty ugly cats-eye-shaped onion rings in the corners. Doesn't seem to happen at all apertures and is only visible on a couple of pictures, but be aware that this can be an issue.
But guess what bugs me most with this lens? It the barrel distortion, which is (in my opinion) too high for a prime lens. I notice it more than any other optical shortcomings of this lens because you notice it right through the viewfinder every single time you have a (supposedly) straight line in your photo.
So would I buy it again? You bet! Given the lack of decent alternatives in that segment, that is.
Would I recommend it? Yes. But get it at a store with a good return policy because you might need to go through a few copies until you find one with good AF. I was lucky on the first try, though.